Interim guidance from EHRC is out

[impossibletoday]

https://x.com/HeadWarriorTWM/status/1915853104421167211?t=qbUrcHVdtPyqVB1uZ5depA&s=19

Are you suggesting they will deliberately break the law?

Presumably for the same reason most people won't steal things.

How much of this is about a right to privacy, and how much is it an insistence that we must perceive someone at all times in the way they wish to be perceived, even when our eyes and ears tell us otherwise?

I suspect this is a legal challenge in the making. To comply with the EA2010 protected characteristic of sex requirements, service providers etc need to know the sex of people, and this is drastically undermined while people can very easily get ID docs that record their sex incorrectly, and get a GRC, and therefore a birth certificate in their opposite sex, with minimal effort and cost.

You're not a woman, so can never know the fear that a rapist might leave you pregnant. Lack of pregnancy risk is one of the reasons why men are inherently safer than women are in men's loos.

How will we keep men out of the ladies if they are really well disguised as women??

(NB this is not a trans-specific question.)

We can't. But they know they shouldn't be there.

If they have female ID but look male we can still chuck them out, ruling and guidance make this clear and why.

This is what I get on my LinkedIn.

If someone really passes 100% of the time and has a GRC i wouldn't be surprised if for the purposes of toilets they ignore the ruling and continue to use the opposite sex ones.

However I suspect that a subset of these people may find that actually they do get challenged because they don't actually pass 100% despite their claims.

I suspect there are a number who say 'I pass' actually mean 'I don't get challenged / people tell me I pass' which of course is not the same thing.

Yes, I do think they will deliberately try to circumvent it!

this is the sort of thing I meant:

https://x.com/SVPhillimore/status/1915862684584550756

What is the point of a GRC if it doesn’t mean you are treated legally as female? It seems confusing to have incorrect sexes listed on official IDs when they don't seem to even confer legal ‘advantages’ as the equality act says they’re irrelevant when considering SSS etc

Good old RMW.

At least something can now take up his time rather than policing threads here

I guess we now wait for legal cases.

quite! Witness dr ‘Clara’ barker saying clara never gets challenged. Gosh I can’t imagine why

https://x.com/jonnywsbell/status/1915877583918428671?s=46

I would respond to the #bekind types that we don't always get what we want in life and that the actual lesbians who don't do dick need legal protections for their same-sex attraction far more than LINOs (lesbian in name only) do for their misnamed bisexuality.

I think generally people are decent and follow the law in the same way most use self service tills properly,

Reading this makes me think how much the Acts introduced are nonsensical and damaging. And that is on the politicians who lacked any foresight whatsoever or perhaps knew and didn’t care.

As a previous poster said, the information is private, it's not secret. Employers can request medicals, or at least full disclosure because they have, by law to consider ALL their employees, not just the trans ones.

But more obviously you could just use your own eyes and ears. I'm yet to see a transwoman (because that's mainly who we're referring to) who moves like a woman.

Union guidance - ignore the law! Only terfs care, and they can't tell that you're a TW!
https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1k809ua/please_ignore_the_ehrc_guidance_at_work/

If this is about privacy, then a previous poster pointed out that the right to privacy does not trump all other rights.

It will be quite comedic if real life examples are used. How can you tell if this person is a man? What about this one?

I can see it as the beginning of quite a lot of dissension in the ranks.

These people do nothing but view the equality act and legislation as a means to trample over other people, largely women.

I bet when they got that privacy aspect established they were leaping for joy. And now the whole world can see why.

oh ffs. It's like some kind of bloody Monty Python sketch

The GRA is basically zombie legislation at this point but yes, I think we will have challenges based on people having opposite sex ID.

I imagine it won't be a big issue for the very small number of trans people who pass well. It will be an issue for the much larger number who think they pass because they haven't been challenged.

I think (IANAL) the relevant bit is that we can exclude same sex people (TW or TM) from a single sex space if they so closely resemble the opposite sex that there could be a reasonable objection to them being there.

So the gotcha they've been using, what if a bloke trying it on shows up with female ID and says "how do you know I'm not a transman", well even if he were he could still be excluded.

I'm sure someone will be dumb enough to provide the occasion for a court to rule on this.

I haven't seen a single person in any of these film clips who confuses me about their sex.

Not one. Where are they all? They keep being used as examples, where are they?

I really wish that someone could explain this in interviews rather than it all being about the poor oppressed, marginalised men who want to grow moobs.

I also want some form of audit trail back to the person who wrote the initial guidance that TW had to be treated as their acquired gender. That person should be held responsible for this mess and if they hold some sort of honour or elevated position for their work in this area those need to be removed too.

As they said themselves, their advice should definitely be taken with a pinch of salt (as it clearly breaks the law).

What an idiot.

Also, "trans girls"? "Girls"? In a workplace?

Good grief.

RMW is forever deluded……saying that organisations should seek further or alternative advice to protect them from falling fowl of the law is ludicrous.

Who does RMW think they should be consulting because they are a more reliable and defensible source than the EHRC?

I can just see the Department for the Environment turning to Jolyon, Sam Knowles or RMW themselves to ensure they don’t fall fowl of the law!

Buried within the madness, RMW makes a valid point about the right to privacy and dignity. However, RMW fails to accept the door has finally closed on trans people being afforded privacy and dignity through accessing single sex provision that does not align with their sex or with their active attempts to present as the opposite sex. This does make life very difficult, as it eliminates access to single sex provision. Urgent action needs to be taken to ensure alternatives are provided.

They don't exist.

There's s very beautiful transwoman model. I can't remember what they're called but they are lovely in a very tall, slim, blonde androgenous way. In many photos they could definitely be female. However, the minute you see them in the flesh move/walk the runway (especially next to women) you are in no doubt they were born male.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, you can't hide a male musculoskeletal system.

Yes I've seen that person. Bizarrely, they walk even more clumsily than a regular man, in my opinion.

It might be to do with the fact that they're trying to make their body do things that they're just not designed for.